HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023CV30130 - City Of Fort Collins V. Directional Plus, Et Al. - 023 - Directional Response To Mastec CrossclaimDISTRICT COURT, LARIMER COUNTY, COLORADO
Court Address: 201 LaPorte Ave., Suite 100
Fort Collins, CO 80521
Plaintiff: CITY OF FORT COLLINS
v.
Defendants: DIRECTIONAL PLUS, LLC and MASTEC
NORTH AMERICA, INC.
▲ COURT USE ONLY ▲
Case Number: 2023CV30130
Division:
Attorneys for Defendant Directional Plus, LLC:
Stuart D. Morse, #16978
Amber L. Brink, #57381
Stuart D. Morse & Associates, LLC
5445 DTC Parkway, Suite 250
Greenwood Village, CO 80111
Telephone: 303-996-6661
Facsimile: Not Designated
smorse@sdmorselaw.com
abrink@sdmorselaw.com
DEFENDANT DIRECTIONAL PLUS, LLC’S RESPONSE TO MASTEC NORTH
AMERICA, INC.’S CROSSCLAIM AGAINST DIRECTIONAL PLUS, LLC
Defendant Directional Plus, LLC (“Directional”), by and through its attorneys, Stuart D.
Morse & Associates, LLC, hereby submits the following Response to MasTec North America,
Inc.,’s (“MasTec) Crossclaim Against Directional Plus, LLC:
Regarding the numbered allegations of MasTec’s Crossclaim, Directional responds as
follows:
PARTIES, JURISDICTION AND VENUE
1. The allegations in this paragraph are not directed at Directional and, therefore, do not
require a response. To the extent a response is required, denied for lack of information or
belief.
DATE FILED: September 19, 2023 11:49 AM
FILING ID: B0D1486A68195
CASE NUMBER: 2023CV30130
2
2. Admitted.
3. Admitted. Directional does not dispute jurisdiction or venue.
4. Directional objects to this manner of pleading, as it is vague and, therefore, unclear. To
the extent that a response is required, Directional denies for lack of information or belief.
GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
5. Directional admits that Plaintiff the City of Fort Collins (“the City”), alleges that
Directional struck and punctured a water main owned by the City. Directional further
admits that the City alleges Directional failed to comply with the statutory procedures for
requesting the City to provide utility locations as set forth in C.R.S. §§ 9-1.5-101 et seq.,
prior to commencing excavation of the boring hole at the Subject Location. Directional
denies that it failed to comply with the statutory procedures set forth in C.R.S. §§ 9-1.5-
101, et. seq. before commencing excavation of the boring hole at the Subject Location.
6. Denied for lack of information or belief.
7. Admitted.
8. Admitted.
9. The contract language speaks for itself and does not require any further response here. It
is denied that Directional caused the damage complained of or is liable for any of the
damages claimed either by the City or MasTec. Any and all remaining allegations, if any
are denied for lack of information or belief.
10. The contract language speaks for itself and does not require any further response here. It
is denied that Directional caused the damage complained of or is liable for any of the
damages claimed either by the City or MasTec. Any and all remaining allegations, if any
are denied for lack of information or belief.
11. The contract language speaks for itself and does not require any further response here. It
is denied that Directional caused the damage complained of or is liable for any of the
damages claimed either by the City or MasTec. Any and all remaining allegations, if any
are denied for lack of information or belief.
12. The contract language speaks for itself and does not require any further response here. It
is denied that Directional caused the damage complained of or is liable for any of the
damages claimed either by the City or MasTec. Any and all remaining allegations, if any
are denied for lack of information or belief.
3
13. The contract language speaks for itself and does not require any further response here. It
is denied that Directional caused the damage complained of or is liable for any of the
damages claimed either by the City or MasTec. Any and all remaining allegations, if any
are denied for lack of information or belief.
14. The contract language speaks for itself and does not require any further response here. It
is denied that Directional caused the damage complained of or is liable for any of the
damages claimed either by the City or MasTec. Any and all remaining allegations, if any
are denied for lack of information or belief.
15. The contract language speaks for itself and does not require any further response here. It
is denied that Directional caused the damage complained of or is liable for any of the
damages claimed either by the City or MasTec. Any and all remaining allegations, if any
are denied for lack of information or belief.
16. The contract language speaks for itself and does not require any further response here. It
is denied that Directional caused the damage complained of or is liable for any of the
damages claimed either by the City or MasTec. Any and all remaining allegations, if any
are denied for lack of information or belief.
17. The contract language speaks for itself and does not require any further response here. It
is denied that Directional caused the damage complained of or is liable for any of the
damages claimed either by the City or MasTec. Any and all remaining allegations, if any
are denied for lack of information or belief.
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
Breach of Contract
18. Directional hereby incorporates its responses to the above paragraphs as if fully set forth
herein.
19. Denied for lack of information or belief.
20. Admitted that the City alleges Directional struck and punctured a water main owned by
the City, which the City further erroneously alleges was due to Directional’s alleged
failure to comply with C.R.S. §§ 9-1.5-101, et. seq. prior to commencing excavation of
the boring hole at the Subject location. Directional denies that it failed to comply with
C.R.S. §§ 9-1.5-101, et. seq. Directional further denies that the punctured water main
was due to Directional’s failure to comply with C.R.S. §§ 9-1.5-101, et. seq. Directional
denies that the puncture of the water line was caused by its negligence or inattention or
that it’s actions or negligence caused any damage.
4
21. Denied for lack of information or belief.
22. (a-g) Denied.
23. The contract language speaks for itself and does not require any further response here. It
is denied that Directional caused the damage complained of or is liable for any of the
damages claimed either by the City or MasTec. Any and all remaining allegations, if any
are denied for lack of information or belief.
24. Denied.
25. Denied.
26. Denied.
27. The allegations in this paragraph do not require a response. To the extent a response is
required, denied for lack of information or belief.
28. Denied for lack of information or belief.
DEFENSES
1. Directional hereby incorporates all defenses set forth in its Answer to the Complaint filed
by the City.
2. The City and MasTec’s damages, if any, may have been caused by its own assumption of a
known risk, which assumption of the risk bars or diminishes any recovery of damages
pursuant to C.R.S. § 13-21-111.7.
3. The City and MasTec’s damages, if any, may have been caused by its own comparative
conduct, or the conduct of others imputed to it, which conduct bars or diminishes any
recovery of damages pursuant to the Colorado comparative negligence statute, C.R.S. § 13-
21-111.
4. The City and MasTec may have failed to reasonably mitigate their damages, if any. See
C.R.S. §901.5-103(7)(a).
5. The City and MasTec’s damages, if any, are not reasonable and/or related to the incident
giving rise to this lawsuit.
6. The City and MasTec’s damages, if any, may have been caused by the negligence of others
for whom Directional was not responsible or over whom Directional had no control.
5
7. The City and MasTec’s damages, if any, may have been caused by circumstances not
anticipated and not reasonably foreseeable by Directional in the exercise of due care.
8. MasTec’s cross claim failed to state a claim against Directional upon which relief may be
granted.
9. Directional exercised the same degree of care, skill, and diligence in the performance of
its work as is ordinarily exercised by other subcontractors in the industry.
10. Directional’s work was free of deficiencies and defects in workmanship.
11. The City and MasTec’s damages, if any, were proximately caused by inadequate project
management and/or incorrect instructions by the City and/or MasTec.
12. The City and Mastec’s damages, if any, did not arise out of and did not result from the
quality of work performed by Directional.
13. The Contract, particularly the indemnity language, between Directional and MasTec, is
void as against public policy and unenforceable pursuant to C.R.S. §13-21-111(6)(b).
14. The City and Mastec’s claims and damages, if any, are subject to and limited by the
Colorado Construction Defect Action Reform Act, C.R.S. §13-20-801, et. seq.
15. The City and MasTec’s claims and damages, if any, may be barred in whole or in part
because Directional substantially complied with the requirements of C.R.S. §901.5-103.
16. Directional reserves the right to amend this Answer to include such other affirmative
defenses as may be supported by evidence.
WHEREFORE, having fully answered MasTec’s crossclaim against Directional,
Defendant Directional prays that the crossclaim herein be dismissed at no cost, that it recovers its
costs and attorney fees herein, and for such other and further relief as the Court may deem just
and proper.
JURY DEMAND
Defendant Directional demands a jury trial with respect to all triable issues herein.
6
Dated this 19th day of September 2023.
Respectfully submitted,
STUART D. MORSE & ASSOCIATES, LLC
Original signature on file at the offices of
Stuart D. Morse & Associates, LLC
By: /s/Stuart D. Morse
Stuart D. Morse, #16978
Amber L. Brink, #57381
Attorneys for Defendant Directional Plus, LLC
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on September 19, 2023, a true and correct copy of the foregoing
DEFENDANT DIRECTIONAL PLUS, LLC’S RESPONSE TO MASTEC NORTH
AMERICA, INC.’S CROSSCLAIM AGAINST DIRECTIONAL PLUS, LLC was
electronically filed through the State of Colorado’s ICCES e-filing system upon all counsel of
record.
Original signature on file at the offices of
Stuart D. Morse & Associates, LLC
/s/ Christine Coriano
Christine Coriano